ArticleInfection prevention in practice2024
An outbreak of
Article in Infection prevention in practice, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Microbial Landscape of Pharmaceutical Failures: A 21-Year Review of FDA Enforcement Reports.Biotech (Basel (Switzerland)) · 2026Review
- Evolutionary Dynamics and Functional Differences in Clinically Relevant Pen β-Lactamases fromJournal of chemical information and modeling · 2025Article
- UnravelingmSystems · 2025Article
- An Intensive Care Outbreak Caused byPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Wound dressing is intended to provide a physical barrier from microorganisms. Spray dressing is convenient and can be applied to wounds of various contours. In July 2020, a cluster of four Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of peritoneal dialysis patients with culture-confirmed BCC exit site infections from January 2011 to July 2020. Outbreak investigations, including case finding, molecular typing and post-outbreak surveillance, were performed. Discussion: A substantial increase in BCC exit site infections has been observed since 2013, rising from 0.23 in 2012 to 1.09 episodes per 100 patient-year in 2015, with the number of cases in the first half of 2020 already surpassing the total from 2019. The potential source had been traced to a spray dressing introduced to exit site care in December 2012. Conclusion: Water-based spray dressing can be a source of BCC causing wound infections. The use of contaminated spray dressing, especially in chronic wounds with proximity to indwelling catheters, may pose an inherent risk to patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.